Limping & Sun-Tzu

I was watching one of the poker shows on TV, I try to record most of them. One of the announcers asked the other, "I wonder what The Art of War (Sun-Tzu) has to say about limping?"
Being a advocate of The Art of War and Poker, I thought I'd take a look at it. There has already been a good book on the subject written by David Apostolico, Tournament Poker and the Art of War, and there is also a web site devoted to it. Sun Tzu's Art of Poker

From "The Art of War" by Sun-Tzu
In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack:
the direct -betting/raising- and the indirect -checking/limping-;
These two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers.
The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn.

It is like moving in a circle — you never come to an end.

Masking strength with weakness is to be effected by tactical dispositions.
Thus one who is skillful at keeping the enemy on the move maintains deceitful appearances, according to which the enemy will act.
He sacrifices something, (so) the enemy may snatch at it.

• Simulated disorder postulates perfect discipline, 
• Simulated fear postulates courage; 
• Simulated weakness postulates strength.

If we wish to fight, the enemy can be forced to an engagement even though he (is) sheltered behind a high rampart and a deep ditch -a wall of chips-. All we need do is attack some other place that he will be obliged to relieve.
If we do not wish to fight, we can prevent the enemy from engaging us even though the lines of our encampment be merely traced out on the ground. All we need do is to throw something odd and unaccountable in his way -Randomness.

• The rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided.

By holding out baits -limping/slow playing-, he keeps him on the march; then with a body of picked men he lies in wait for him.
By holding out advantages -showing weakness- to him, he can cause the enemy to approach of his own accord; or, by inflicting damage, he can make it impossible for the enemy to draw near.

Whoever is first -to act-with-active or passive Aggression- in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle - will arrive exhausted.

• Hence that general is skillful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skillful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack.

Numerical weakness - lack of chips - comes from having to prepare against possible attacks; numerical strength -many chips-, (by) compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us.

• Though the enemy be stronger in numbers, we may prevent him from fighting. 
• Scheme so as to discover his plans and the likelihood of their success.

If we are able thus to attack an inferior force with a superior one, our opponents will be in dire straits.

• When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped.

Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances -Randomness- .

Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows;
the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing.
Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics -Randomness- in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain.

• So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.

Patience vs Speed & Utility

https://sites.google.com/site/ljmangold/home/poker-strategy/patience-vs-speed-and-utility
From Arnold Snyder's Tournament Formula Poker 2
A must read for any tournament player, it's all about Deep Stack Poker tournaments.

The blind structure in relation to the number of chips each player starts with is the primary consideration on deciding if you should even enter a tournament, yet alone on what your strategy should be. The lower the patience factor, the more aggressive you have to be. The lower the patience factor, the more luck prevails over skill. 

The Patience or Speed Factor (PF) is the first step in determining how, or even if, you should play any tournament.

First you need the tournament structure sheet that shows how many chips you start with, what the starting blinds are and how ofter they are raised.

Starting Chips = $1000       Full Table (9 players)
Level    Blinds+Anties    Total    Time til blinds raise    Cumulative    M (# Big Blinds)
   1          25/25              50            20 Minutes            50             (40) (1000/25)
   2          25/50              75            20 Minutes           125            
   3          50/100          150            20 Minutes           275 
                                     (end of 1st hour)
   4         100/200          300            20 Minutes           575  
   5         100/200+25     425            20 Minutes          1000  

The amount of time it takes to "Blind Off" all your chips, without ever actually making a bet, is the Patience Factor, also the beginning the Minefield. In the above example you will be out of chips after 1 hour and 40 minutes, or 1.67 hours. Square that and you have the (PF) Patience Factor, in this case, 2.76 (Level 1). Which means you will most likely be all-in on the first hand you play, if you have to go to the river, as this would be a FAST Tournament. Anything less the Level 4, is a short stack tournament, no need to even look at the Utility Factor (UF).

(PF) Patience Factor Skill Level
1.49 or less	0
1.50 to 2.99	1
3.00 to 4.49	2
4.50 to 5.99	3
6.00 to 7.49	4
7.50 to 9.99	5
10.00 and up	6

The Minefield portion of the tournament is where you will see many players, mostly short stacked, making a last ditch effort to remain in the tournament or chip leaders trying to pick-off the dead money. This is also where players try to get past the bubble. Lots of All-in betting.

 The Utility Factor (UF) is the 2nd step in determining how, or even if, you should play any tournament. Think again that your chips are ammunition, not just chips. The more chips you have, the better you can utilize them. The higher your utility factor, the more power and flexibility you have. Your utility is based on having at least an "M" of 60, In the above example, you are only 67% competitive. Divide your "M" by the basic competitive "M", to give you your competitive factor, in this case 40/60 = .67 "U" (utility). Multiply your Patience Factor times your "U" to get your Utility Factor, in this case it's, 1.79.

Clearly this is not a tournament worth playing, but it is typical for a "Shoot Out" Tournament where the winner of each table meets at the final table to play for the big prize, and starting chips may be doubled.

Your Utility Factor (UF) can range from 0 to over 200, which gives you ranks from 0 to 6.

A range from 0 to 40 and a rank of 0 to 2 is a short stacked tournament. A range from 41 to 100 gives you a ranking from 3 to 4 and good utility. A range from 101 to over 200 gives you a ranking from 5 to 6 and full utility.

UTILITY FACTOR
Quick Reference Chart (Adjusted to Patience Factor)
	Utility Factor	Rank	Comments
Short                         Stacked	0-5	0	Not a pro-level event, a crapshootat best.	KP
	6-20	1	Low utility from the start, take early risks to double up, mostlyLong Ball, often a crapshoot by midpoint in tournament.	RCB
	21-40	2	Low utility by second hour, some small ball may be possible in early levels, go for an early double-up. Very fast in-the-money portion	Zone
Deep            Stacked	41-60	3	About two hours of competitive utility, more Small Ball is possible, fast by the money phase, good for aggressive semi-pros, still some ability to play at the final table.	AoW
	61-100	4	Good utility for small ball, more trouble for amateurs, early chip accumulation can keep utility until the end, becomes mostly Long Ball by the money portion.	AoW/SB
	101-200	5	Full utility possible all the way to the final table, pros will dominate, Small Ball skills will pay well.	SB/SA
	201+	6	Full utility from start to finish, pros rule, amateurs will be knocked out, high-end poker skills and top tournament skills required.	M/C

If you are not using these to determine which tournament relies more on Skill or Luck, you might as well be playing Roulette.

I NEVER BLUFF

FLOP RANKINGS

Currently reading Every Hand Revealed by Gus Hanson.

If you have every watched poker on TV, you know they don't show every hand played. This makes it hard for new players to learn what hand to play and when to play them and how to play them. One of the chief reasons I think there are more aggressive players in the games than a few years ago. Gus Hanson takes you through most, not every, of the hands he was dealt when he won the Aussie Poker Millions tournament in 2007.

I'm about a third of the way thourgh and it looks like Gus is really only playing in hands he thinks he can get heads up in, unless he has a top hand. Most of the hands he plays are payed aggressively, from any position. The players appear to be less aggressive than you see on TV, which could be missleading, but may be due to not really knowing about the hands he is not in.

Still, it shows how aggression will win pots that would be lost if you didn't try to reduce the field and try to get heads up. Which leads to some thinking about reading the board again and what you are likely up against.

I like to rate the board, especially when I'm not in the hand, and see if I can figure out who has what. I rate flops from A+ to C, because even what some might consider a D type of nothing flop can lead to a monster on the end, but most players aren't going to go to the Turn or River without a hand that has the potential to win, unless you like to gamble or you're a Mental Midget.

FLOP RATINGS
A+
(usually hits someone - can lead to Big Pots)
Royal Flush, (Ace + K-Q-J) +/- gapped
Straight Flush (any) +/- gapped
Trips (any)
High Pair (AA-TT) + 1 Broadway card (A-T)

A
(usually hits someone - can lead to Big Pots)
3 Broadway Cards (AKQJT) +/- 2 are Suited or Gapped
2 Broadway Cards + Suited card less than a Ten
High Pair (AA-KK) - NO other Broadway Card
Ace Suited + 1 Broadway card, not suited

B+
(likely to hit more than one player - can lead to Big Pots - but may be 50/50 race)
High Pair (QQ-JJ-TT) - NO other Broadway Card
Middle Pairs (99-88-77-66) + Ace
3 Suited cards
Ace Suited with a card lower than a Ten
Ace non-Suited + 1 Broadway card
2 Broadway cards + 1 card less than a Ten

B
(hits limpers the most)
Middle Pair (99-88-77-66)  + K-Q-J - NO Ace
Ace + Low Pair (22-55)
Pair lower than a Ten + K-Q-J
Ace - non-Suited + Middle Connectors (9876)
J or T + 98 +/- 2 are Suited
3 middle connectors - (9876) +/- gap

B-
1 Broadway + 2 cards lower than a Ten
Low Pair (22-55) with NO Ace

C+
Low Straight (2345) +/- suited or gapped

C
anything else

The Turn and the River can change anything, but the right play on the Flop may cut out the draws that can win on the last two streets.

I NEVER BLUFF

RANKING HANDS AND POINT SYSTEMS

Lets agree that an Ace is the highest card in the deck and is worth the highest points. There are probably as many point systems for poker as there are poker games and the various ways to play them. I think it's best to keep it simple, so I rank the Ace the highest, by about 2 points and the rest at about face value. My point system adds for pairs, connectors and suited cards, since an AA or AK should have a higher value than AT or A9 or A4.

An Ace therefore would be worth 12 points and a K,Q,J,T would all be worth 10.
Since Kings out rank Jacks and Tens, it should really have a higher rank than 10. and giving a higher rank also to Jacks, so we should probably give a one point advantage of Jacks over Tens, which makes a Jack worth 11, Queen worth 12 and King worth 13. Now the Ace should have that 2 point advantage, so I'll give it 15 points.

It's hard to put a value on a pair since 22 will win heads up about 55% of the time and only 12% against a full table and beats AK. Given that a deuce has about a 2 point rank and only 4 points counting both cards, based on face value, and AK would have a value of twenty-eight (15 for the Ace and 13 for the King), we should give a factor to pairs, suited cards and connectors. We'll start a Pair off at 20 points and add a point for card value. We will also add one point for being connected and 2 points for being suited and 3 points if it's connected and suited.

So the lowest pair (22) would equal 22 points and a pair of threes (33) would equal 23 points and a pair of nines (99) would equal 29 points and add one point higher for each broadway card; TT=30 (20+10), JJ=31 (20+11), and QQ=32 (20+12), KK=33 (20+13), and AA=35 (20+15)
22 vs AKs;
AKs = 31 points [(15+13) +1 for the connector, +2 for being suited] vs the 2 deuces @ 22 points.

If you loosly equate it to odds, then AKs would be favored 31/22 or about 1.4:1. (actually 1.409, but a tenth of a point is really no consideration in betting or looking at odds of any kind, not a factor at all, so round up) and KK vs AKs; KK would be favored 33/31 or 1.06:1.
KK vs 22, KK favored 33/22 or 1.5:1

What's all this mean?
Only that you shouldn't bet the farm. At best, heads up you are usually about 49/51, more likely about 60/40 and at worst only a 3:1 dog, using normal odds, and normal hands for All-In bets, and the point system would only show a slight advantage, since it all changes by the river, and you can throw any point system out the window.

Favorite-to-underdog matchup Probability Odds, discounting suitability

Pair vs. 2 undercards (AA vs KQ is only slightly better than 88 vs 34)
83% to 17% or 4.9 : 1

Pair vs. lower pair (AA vs KK about the same as 88 vs 33)
82% to 18% or 4.5 : 1

Pair vs. 1 overcard, 1 undercard (KK vs AQ not much better than 88 vs 97)
71% to 29% or 2.5 : 1

2 overcards vs. 2 undercards (AK vs QJ about the same as 98 vs 76)
63% to 37% or 1.7 : 1

Pair vs. 2 overcards (QQ vs AK and 88 vs 9T)
55% to 45% or 1.2 : 1

Max points are 35 for the AA and minimum is 6 for the 23, 5 at face value, plus 1 for being connected. In a normal counting system, many people will play any hand with 2 cards totaling 18 or higher, which would be an 8 and 10, or any pair. Aggressive players like Daniel Negreanu, will add some connectors and suited cards to their range. Some say any cards that can be connected on the flop, like one or 2 gaps, or even 3 gaps, are connectors. and look for luck to help them with a miracle flop.

This point system adds up to 3 points which lets you reasonably increase your range of cards by giving an 89 a 18 point count becuse it's connected, or 19 points if suited, and 20 points if it's both.

In a normal count a KK would count the same as a TT, where this system gives a better value for KK at 33 points and significally better than the 89 which is only 3 points lower the the normal KK of 20 points.
Now a hand of JJ at 31 points against the 18 to 20 points players normally use would be 31/18 or 1.72:1.

You can use to help decide how much to bet or raise against a normal hand if you end up heads up and in position against the range of hands people play, depending on their position. It makes your hand look stronger, because it is.

Can you use it as a betting tool on the flop?
Look at it compared to the flop rating system: A+, A, B+, etc.
How about betting about 1.72 more than the normal bet? If the normal bet is 3 times the big blind, you could make it a little more than 4.5 times the big blind (3+1.72) if you have a 31 point hand vs a normal 20 piont hand. Pro's seem to like to make normal bets look different, like a $325 bet when $300 is 3 times the big blind or $16,200 when a $15,000 bet is the normal bet.

I NEVER BLUFF

Harrington vs Snyder

Great controversy.
I've read both, used both, and would highly recommend reading all of Dan Harrington's books as well as all of Arnold Snyder's books.
Snyder may put down Harrington too much for my comfort, but Harrington has lifetime tournament winnings of $6,319,179 and Snyder has ???????? Can't find him on any list.

That said, Snyder's greatest value has to do with card room tournaments that are too fast for skill to be of any value and Harrington doesn't even go there. I think anyone who has read any of Harrington's and/or Snyder's books, can get great value out of both, and they should be re-read as you advance in your playing skill and learning more about poker.

The Super System 1 & 2, is still the place to start. Dan Harrington's Zone Poker is more of a conservative approach while Arnold Snyder's Rochambeau style with the Speed and Aggression Factors are more aggressive. I think both should be used at the same time, kind of like switching gears. I've even used the Kill Phil approach in some games. I like to blend all of these into the Art of War Poker, as a playing style.

I Never Bluff

Mr Lucky

Knowledge is POWER.
Here I am in my quest to improve, learning as much as I can about the games of poker. From Mike Sexton, "the game that takes a minute to learn but a lifetime to master". One of the things I try to do is to learn something new every day.

Trying to live each game by the Golden Rule of Poker:  
Patience is a virtue!

Golden Rule:   
Be Patient! Do not check, call, bet, raise or fold without asking yourself:
What is this hand’s best possibility to win? Who is in this hand and what is their play style and chip stack size? Always try to take the same amount of time to make a decision, call for “Time”, randomly.

"I Never Bluff"